...
首页> 外文期刊>The Egyptian Heart Journal >Differentiation between atrioventricular reentrant tachycardia (AVRT) and AV nodal reentrant tachycardia (AVNRT)
【24h】

Differentiation between atrioventricular reentrant tachycardia (AVRT) and AV nodal reentrant tachycardia (AVNRT)

机译:房室折返性心动过速(AVRT)和房室结折返性心动过速(AVNRT)之间的区别

获取原文

摘要

Differentiation between atrioventricular reentrant tachycardia (AVRT) and AV nodal reentrant tachycardia (AVNRT) can be sometimes challenging in the EP lab. RV pacing during SVT produces progressive QRS fusion before QRS morphology becomes stable. This fusion zone (FZ) may differentiate AVRT from AVNRT independent of entrainment success. PPI-TCL during RV entrainment can help in differentiation; however it has some fallacies and limitations. We thought to compare the accuracy of atrial preexcitation (AP) & Stimulus to atrial (S-A) interval fixation in relation to fusion zone in identifying the mechanism of SVT.We studied retrospectively and prospectively the effect of properly timed RVP on atrial timing during FZ. 118 SVT patients had RVP within 40ms shorter than tachycardia cycle length (TCL). S–A interval and atrial CL were measured during FZ and with each QRS complex thereafter. A fixed S–A interval was defined as variation <5ms during RVP & AP is the first change in atrial CL?10ms.9 patients were excluded due to cycle length oscillation>10ms before the onset of RVP and 6 patients had atrial tachycardia (VA dissociation with RVP) and were excluded. In the remaining 103 patients, PPI-TCL was significantly longer in AVNRT patients but postpacing response couldn’t be assessed in 12 patients who showed consistent termination of tachycardia during RVP entrainments; 3 AVNRT patients (5%) & 9 AVRT patients (22%). And when assessed it was not diagnostic in additional 4 (6%) patients with AVNRT (<115ms) & 7 (17%) patients with ORT (?115ms). Atrial pre-excitation (AP) occurred during FZ in most AVRT patients and after FZ in most AVNRT patients. However, S-A fixation occurred during FZ in all AVRT patients and after FZ in all AVNRT patients. Fixation of S-A interval in relation to FZ was more accurate than either AP or PPI-TCL in identifying the mechanism of SVT (100%, 92.4% and 84.8% consecutively).We can conclude that during RVP within 40 ms of the tachycardia cycle length, fixed S–A interval and AP in relation to FZ were superior to PPI-TCL measurement in identifying the mechanism of SVT.
机译:在EP实验室中,有时房室折返性心动过速(AVRT)与AV结折返性心动过速(AVNRT)之间的区别有时会很困难。 SVT期间的RV起搏会在QRS形态变得稳定之前产生渐进的QRS融合。该融合区(FZ)可能使AVRT与AVNRT区别开来,而与夹带成功无关。 RV夹带期间的PPI-TCL有助于分化。但是它有一些谬误和局限性。我们认为比较心房预激(AP)和刺激与心房(S-A)间隔固定在融合区之间的准确度,以鉴定SVT的机制。 118例SVT患者的RVP比心动过速周期长度(TCL)短40ms。在FZ期间以及之后的每个QRS复合体中测量S–A间隔和心房CL。固定的S–A间隔被定义为RVP和AP期间的变化<5ms是心房CL?10ms的首次变化。9例患者由于RVP发作前的周期长度振荡> 10ms而被排除,而6例患者发生了心动过速(VA)与RVP分离)并排除在外。在其余103例患者中,AVNRT患者的PPI-TCL明显更长,但12例在RVP夹带期间表现出持续的心动过速终止的患者无法评估起搏后反应; 3例AVNRT患者(5%)和9例AVRT患者(22%)。评估后,它对另外4例(6%)AVNRT(<115ms)和7例(17%)ORT(?115ms)患者没有诊断价值。大多数AVRT患者在FZ期间发生心房预激(AP),大多数AVNRT患者在FZ之后发生心房预激。然而,所有AVRT患者在FZ期间和所有AVNRT患者在FZ之后均发生S-A固定。在确定SVT的机制方面,相对于FZ固定SA间隔相对于AP或PPI-TCL更准确(连续100%,92.4%和84.8%)。我们可以得出结论,在RVP期间,心动过速周期长度为40 ms ,与SZ相关的固定S–A间隔和AP在确定SVT的机制方面优于PPI-TCL测量。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号